The editorial is the typical argument made against something by picking an example of liberals being intolerant of conservative views.

I find it interesting that the example chosen was less about intolerance and more about a free capitalist society. Mozilla decided that Brendan Eich was detrimental to its bottom line.

We are not talking about a different view of federal spending or how engaged we should be militarily on the world stage. We are talking about support for a bill that codifies discrimination.

I'm certain that those last two words will be taken as validation of the argument presented in your paper. I intolerantly labeled Eich's donation to a cause designed to disallow same-sex couples from getting married in California.

But how else can you characterize it? A bill that tells two consenting adults that they are not entitled to experience one of the greatest joys in life is discriminatory.